A place to ask questions and add to probative and informative discussions associated with the various aspects of the field of fire investigation. -- FORUM RULES---BE CIVIL AND NO NAME CALLING, NO BELITTLING, NO BERATING, NO DENIGRATING others. Postings in violation of these rules can be removed or editted to remove the offending remarks at the discretion of the moderators and/or site administrator.
Re: So no causes what do yall think.
Posted by:
J L Mazerat (IP Logged)
Date: July 18, 2021 01:22PM
Please tell me what training a fire investigator has in psychology. Intent specifically deals with what was in the persons mind at the time the person took a specific action. I cannot find any training associated with fire investigations that covers that area of expertise. Sure, you can apply physical evidence in the effort to suggest the persons intent. In some cases that may be enough for a conviction or to deny him of insurance proceeds. Can you show me testing that has been done that can determine the accuracy of applying physical evidence suggesting a person’s intent as to the actual persons intent? Can you show me testing that has been done that can determine the accuracy of applying physical evidence suggesting a person’s intent as to the actual person’s intent? Does not the scientific method require the hypothesis to be tested. How do you conduct this test to where one can guarantee beyond a doubt that based on the physical evidence there can be no other reasoning for the person’s action?
As an example, I have a fire scene with positive samples of gasoline in different location in the hallway and on the bed in the master bedroom. Is this sufficient to determine a person’s intent? What if the person states that he was working on something like a lawnmower on the bed and spilled gasoline on the bed and on the floor when he was taking the lawn more out of the house?
Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group